Rosendale v. McNulty

50 A. 850, 23 R.I. 465, 1902 R.I. LEXIS 135
Supreme Court of Rhode Island·Decided January 8, 1902·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

(1) The defendant, Mary McNulty, has refused to answer questions put to her in taking her-deposition, upon the ground that her answers would criminate herself. The questions do not show that such a result would be possible, and hence the questions should have been answered. A writ of attachment against said Mary McNulty will issue, unless at such time as shall be fixed by the master, within *466 twenty days from this date, she shall appear before him and answer the questions which she refused to answer and shall also within that time pay the costs upon this citation, to he taxed by the clerk, and an additional sum of ten dollars for counsel’s fee for complainant’s counsel, which sums are not to he recovered back in any event.

T. M. O’Reilly, for complainants. J. M. Brennan, for respondent.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Rosendale v. McNulty, 50 A. 850, 23 R.I. 465, 1902 R.I. LEXIS 135 (R.I. 1902).

50 A. 850 (Rosendale v. McNulty) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Pari
430 A.2d 429 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1981)
Kiszkiel v. Gwiazda
383 A.2d 1348 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1978)
State v. Hasney
341 A.2d 729 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1975)
In Re Berman
287 P. 125 (California Court of Appeal, 1930)
Sovereign Camp Woodmen of the World v. Bailey
163 S.W. 683 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1914)